Trends in advanced imaging use for women undergoing breast cancer surgery

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Breslin, Tara M. en_US
dc.contributor.author Banerjee, Mousumi en_US
dc.contributor.author Gust, Cathryn en_US
dc.contributor.author Birkmeyer, Nancy J. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2013-03-05T18:17:35Z
dc.date.available 2014-05-01T14:28:10Z en_US
dc.date.issued 2013-03-15 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Breslin, Tara M.; Banerjee, Mousumi; Gust, Cathryn; Birkmeyer, Nancy J. (2013). "Trends in advanced imaging use for women undergoing breast cancer surgery." Cancer 119(6): 1251-1256. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/96699> en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0008-543X en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1097-0142 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/96699
dc.description.abstract BACKGROUND: Evidence‐based guidelines recommend limited perioperative diagnostic imaging for new breast cancer diagnoses. For patients aged >65 years, conventional imaging use (mammography, plain radiographs, and ultrasound) has remained stable, whereas advanced imaging (computed tomography [CT], nuclear medicine scans [positron emission tomography/bone scans], and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) use has increased. In this study, the authors evaluated traditional and advanced imaging use among younger patients (aged ≤65 years) undergoing breast cancer surgery. METHODS: The MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Research Database from 2005 through 2008 was analyzed to evaluate the use of conventional and advanced diagnostic imaging associated with surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or stage I through III invasive breast cancer. RESULTS: The study cohort included 52,202 women (13% with DCIS and 87% with stage I‐III breast cancer). The proportion of patients undergoing conventional imaging remained stable, whereas the average number of conventional imaging tests per patient increased from 4.21 tests in 2005 to 4.79 tests per patient in 2008 ( P < .0001). For advanced imaging, the proportion of women who underwent imaging increased from 48.8% in 2005 to 68.8% in 2008 ( P < .0001), as did the number of tests per patient (from 1.53 tests in 2005 to 1.98 tests in 2008; P < .0001). MRI examinations accounted for nearly all of the increase in advanced imaging. Patients who underwent MRI examinations received significantly more traditional imaging tests compared with to those who did not, indicating that these tests are additive and are not replacing traditional imaging. CONCLUSIONS: The current results demonstrate that the use of perioperative breast MRI has increased among women aged <65 years. Further study is indicated to determine whether the benefits of this procedure justify increased use. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society. The use of advanced imaging in women aged <65 years with breast cancer is increasing. Magnetic resonance imaging examinations accounts for nearly all of the increase in advanced imaging and is associated with increased use of traditional imaging, such as mammography and ultrasound. en_US
dc.publisher Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company en_US
dc.subject.other Breast Cancer en_US
dc.subject.other Technology en_US
dc.subject.other Patterns of Care en_US
dc.subject.other Magnetic Resonance Imaging en_US
dc.subject.other Imaging en_US
dc.title Trends in advanced imaging use for women undergoing breast cancer surgery en_US
dc.rights.robots IndexNoFollow en_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel Oncology and Hematology en_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel Public Health en_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel Health Sciences en_US
dc.description.peerreviewed Peer Reviewed en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationum Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationother 1500 East Medical Center Drive, 3217 Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI 48109‐5932 en_US
dc.identifier.pmid 23212691 en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurl http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96699/1/27838_ftp.pdf
dc.identifier.doi 10.1002/cncr.27838 en_US
dc.identifier.source Cancer en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty‐year follow‐up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 1233 ‐ 1241. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, Feuer EJ, Brown ML. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010‐2020. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103: 117 ‐ 128. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2011‐2012. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2011. Available at: http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@epidemiologysurveilance/documents/document/acspc‐030975.pdf. Accessed November 4, 2011. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Dinan MA, Curtis LH, Hammill BG, et al. Changes in the use and costs of diagnostic imaging among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, 1999‐2006. JAMA. 2010; 303: 1625 ‐ 1631. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Arrington AK, Jarosek SL, Virnig BA, Habermann EB, Tuttle TM. Patient and surgeon characteristics associated with increased use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009; 16: 2697 ‐ 2704. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference DeMichele A, Putt M, Zhang Y, Glick JH, Norman S. Older age predicts a decline in adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations for patients with breast carcinoma: evidence from a tertiary care cohort of chemotherapy‐eligible patients. Cancer. 2003; 97: 2150 ‐ 2159. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Lazovich D, Raab KK, Gurney JG, Chen H. Knowledge and preference for breast conservation therapy among women without breast cancer. Womens Health Issues. 2000; 10: 210 ‐ 216. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Breast Cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Fort Washington, PA: NCCN; 2010. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/breast.pdf. [Access date.] en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Lord SJ, Lei W, Craft P, et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an addition to mammography and ultrasound in screening young women at high risk of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2007; 43: 1905 ‐ 1917. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Morrow M. Magnetic resonance imaging in the breast cancer patient: curb your enthusiasm. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 352 ‐ 353. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Azzone V, Frank RG, Pakes JR, Earle CC, Hassett MJ. Behavioral health services for women who have breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 706 ‐ 712. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Korley FK, Pham JC, Kirsch TD. Use of advanced radiology during visits to US emergency departments for injury‐related conditions, 1998‐2007. JAMA. 2010; 304: 1465 ‐ 1471. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Smith‐Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Larson EB. Rising use of diagnostic medical imaging in a large integrated health system. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008; 27: 1491 ‐ 1502. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Mitchell JM. Utilization trends for advanced imaging procedures: evidence from individuals with private insurance coverage in California. Med Care. 2008; 46: 460 ‐ 466. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007; 57: 75 ‐ 89. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Houssami N, Hayes DF. Review of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in breast cancer: should MRI be performed on all women with newly diagnosed, early stage breast cancer? CA Cancer J Clin. 2009; 59: 290 ‐ 302. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Turnbull L, Brown S, Harvey I, et al. Comparative effectiveness of MRI in breast cancer (COMICE) trial: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010; 375: 563 ‐ 571. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference American Society of Breast Surgeons. Position Statement on the Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Surgical Oncology. Columbia, MD: American Society of Breast Surgeons; 2010. Available at: http://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/PDF_Statements/MRI.pdf. [Access date.] en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Marcotte‐Bloch C, Balu‐Maestro C, Chamorey E, et al. MRI for the size assessment of pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): a prospective study of 33 patients. Eur J Radiol. 2011; 77: 462 ‐ 467. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Baker LC, Atlas SW, Afendulis CC. Expanded use of imaging technology and the challenge of measuring value. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008; 27: 1467 ‐ 1478. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Government Accounting Office. Medicare pt B Imaging Services: Rapid Spending Growth and Shift to Physician Offices Indicate Need for CMS to Consider Additional Management Practices. Washington, DC: Government Accounting Office; 2008. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute. National Program of Cancer Registries: 1999‐2008 Incidence: WONDER [online database]. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute; 2011. Available at: http://wonder.cdc.gov/cancernpcr‐v2008.html. Accessed November 2, 2011. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Habermann EB, Abbott A, Parsons HM, Virnig BA, Al‐Refaie WB, Tuttle TM. Are mastectomy rates really increasing in the United States? J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 3437 ‐ 3441. en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference Schnipper LE, Smith TJ, Raghavan D, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology identifies 5 key opportunities to improve care and reduce costs: the top 5 list for oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30: 1715 ‐ 1724. en_US
dc.owningcollname Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed
 Show simple item record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)


Search Deep Blue

Advanced Search

Browse by

My Account

Information

Coming Soon


MLibrary logo